You know the type – someone smart, with a thirst for knowledge, a good natural thinker, but through circumstances of one’s life excluded from a broader scholarly conversation. Those are intelligent people outside the intellectual milieu, the lonely thinkers.
Their tragedy is self-induced. The lonely thinkers tend to develop a theory, and there is no one to challenge it. Working alone on a theory is incredibly hard, because it is so incredibly easy. They mistake their own excitement that comes from insight for the revelations of truth, and become seduced and captured by their own ideas. Gradually, the mental positive reinforcements create an unassailable and graceful castle of beliefs that explain everything just right. The only nagging worry is that others do not appreciate or use their discoveries.
It is so hard to reconcile one’s convictions with the indifference of other people that some succumb to the madness of conspiracy theories. Such thinkers believe the evil forces suppress the truth intentionally. Others include in their theories a belief that all other people are very stupid, which completes the lonely thinker’s system. The loneliness becomes justified and arrogant, the Truth becomes whole and impenetrable by doubt. But if the world does not want to hear you out, and you are so right, then it is one of the two: people are evil or they are stupid. Underneath all of that is a deeply held fear of own incompetence, suppressed.
But wait, don’t we all suffer sometimes from the lonely thinker’s fallacy? It happens when we work on a specific project in isolation for too long. It happens when we pursue exotic theories no one in our field can understand and therefore critique. We all do fall in love with our neat theories and favorite hypotheses. An alcoholic’s brain comes up with myriad sophisticated excuses to get a drink. Just like that, a scholar’s brain will find many reasons how to ignore rather than honestly consider criticisms or disconfirming data.
Oh yes, we all have been there, for creating new knowledge and being confronted by others is so painful. Admitting that you have missed this little thing and that little thing, and that you completely ignored this large hole in your argument, and that your data just does not say what you think it says… So painful, so necessary, so very human it is.
Their tragedy is self-induced. The lonely thinkers tend to develop a theory, and there is no one to challenge it. Working alone on a theory is incredibly hard, because it is so incredibly easy. They mistake their own excitement that comes from insight for the revelations of truth, and become seduced and captured by their own ideas. Gradually, the mental positive reinforcements create an unassailable and graceful castle of beliefs that explain everything just right. The only nagging worry is that others do not appreciate or use their discoveries.
It is so hard to reconcile one’s convictions with the indifference of other people that some succumb to the madness of conspiracy theories. Such thinkers believe the evil forces suppress the truth intentionally. Others include in their theories a belief that all other people are very stupid, which completes the lonely thinker’s system. The loneliness becomes justified and arrogant, the Truth becomes whole and impenetrable by doubt. But if the world does not want to hear you out, and you are so right, then it is one of the two: people are evil or they are stupid. Underneath all of that is a deeply held fear of own incompetence, suppressed.
But wait, don’t we all suffer sometimes from the lonely thinker’s fallacy? It happens when we work on a specific project in isolation for too long. It happens when we pursue exotic theories no one in our field can understand and therefore critique. We all do fall in love with our neat theories and favorite hypotheses. An alcoholic’s brain comes up with myriad sophisticated excuses to get a drink. Just like that, a scholar’s brain will find many reasons how to ignore rather than honestly consider criticisms or disconfirming data.
Oh yes, we all have been there, for creating new knowledge and being confronted by others is so painful. Admitting that you have missed this little thing and that little thing, and that you completely ignored this large hole in your argument, and that your data just does not say what you think it says… So painful, so necessary, so very human it is.
An interesting hypothesis, and certainly worth significant consideration... Obviously, not written by a lonely thinker.
ReplyDeleteDo you consider Grigori Perelman as a lonely thinker?
ReplyDeleteHaha! Yes. I am a doctoral student, new to publishing, and am repeatedly shattered and chagrined by feedback. Whatever ... those ideas are not me. Thanks Alexander. --Danny
ReplyDelete